Talk:DVD+RW

Difference between DVD+RW and DVD-RW

This article is missing any information that helps understand the difference between the + and - variants Pemboid (talk) 08:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Reading this as someone who needed information on the difference I have not found the answer here. There seems to be quite a lot of specialist language here too that I'm not sure everyone would understand yettie0711 (talk) 13:03, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

pricing not true

I do not believe this is true anymore "For computer use, the DVD-R non-rewritable variant of DVD-RW is vastly more popular than DVD+R, and mail order or bulk pricing of DVD-R media is significantly cheaper than DVD+R."

Yes, that's not true anymore. DVD±R and DVD±RW media I've seen recently was exactly the same in price.

CD-RW don't have random access?

I use CD-RW's and its not true I need to delete the entire content of the CD before adding new content. I think the statement that you do need to restart CD-RW's might be outdated or need revision. 128.176.152.224 08:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this article should be marked for an update and possibly combined with the other DVD-related articles. As for the rewriting issue, the *physical* properties of a DVD+R(W) vs. DVD-R(W) or DVD-RAM and the *logical* format the data are written on them are frequently confused. We are only talking about the logical structure here. In the given example, a CD-RW in ISO-9660 format can only be written linearly and has to be erased before a rewrite, the article is correct here. However, a CD-RW can also be formatted using a UDF file system, thus allowing random access. I don’t see a reason why this should be different for a DVD in computer use, this mainly depends on the software used. Differences certainly exist in the DVD video recording formats. In analogy to the CD-RW, a DVD-RW can be used in either DVD-Video format (usually for compatibility reasons), which does not allow editing once recorded, or in DVD-VR format. The latter provides for editing similarly to a DVD-RAM, but is not understood by many players. Some recorders even allow using DVD-VR format on write-once DVD-R discs. The +VR format seems to be similar, but seeks to find a compromise between compatibility and editing features. Unfortunately, neither consortium publishes even a high-level description of their formats, thus making it difficult to compare them with respect to efficiency and compatibility...

All the current disc formats support random access via packet incremental formatting. This is a method of allowing the disc to be accessed via any utility that would normally write to a hard disc drive or FLASH memory drive via its drive letter. That is: once the disc has been packet incremental formatted, a dedicated disc writing utility is not required (other than the packet incremental format utility which operates transparently to the user). Packet incremental format allows files to be added and deleted individually as well as modified. On rewritable media the space occupied by deleted files is released for future use. Obviously for non rewritable media, the space occupied by a deleted file cannot be released for reuse. All packet incremental utilities support rewritable media, but support for non rewritable is much more patchy with some of the more popular utilities not supporting it. The CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-R, DVD-RW, HDDVD-R and HDDVD-RW format discs were never designed to be accessed randomly, and the driver has to leave large gaps between subsequent write attempts. Unfortunately, the gap is not always large enough and occasionally, the write will take place over valid data effectively destroying the disc. The DVD+R, DVD+RW, BD-R and BD-RE format discs are accesible with byte accuracy and consequently there is no problem with disc destruction on subsequent data writes. DVD-RAM is only accessed in random access format (its what the RA stands for in the acronym). DVD-RAM has no real relationship to the other disc formats as it is a hard sectored more or less normal disc.

The DVD-VR and DVD+VR video recorder formats are quite distinct. The DVD-VR recorder format produces a recorded disc that is completely incompatible with standard video only players. DVD-VR also allows some editing via the creation of playlists. DVD+VR, on the other hand, is a format that is completely compatible with standard video only players. It also does not support editing via playlists. The acronyms DVD-VR and DVD+VR are not related to the DVD-RW and DVD+RW media. DVD+VR can be recorded on DVD-RW discs and DVD-VR can be recorded on DVD+RW. In practice, writing DVD+VR to DVD-RW discs is never done. This is because the DVD-RW disc is not designed to be randomly accessed, therefore adding more video to an already recorded DVD+VR format disc requires that the whole of the existing video be read, buffered, the disc erased, and rewritten with the new video. 86.171.45.130 (talk) 17:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Widescreen

Surely there should be some mention of the DVD+RW standard's inability to correctly make widescreen anamorphic recordings from widescreen anamorphic broadcasts, e.g. from digital set top boxes. (This may be more of an issue in Europe). This does seem to be a major oversight in the standard.

This article not focused on the +RW issue at all it’s a general review on DVD

not true!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is not correct. DVD+RW supports widescreen in exactly the same way as DVD-RW. The difference lies purely in the way the disc is written to.

You may have been mislead because some hardware manufacturers (notably Toshiba and Matsushita) did not condone the existence of the '+' variant of the media and initially didn't support it at all and later supported it in a half hearted way. Current generations of Panasonic DVD recorders are deliberately crippled so that they will not correctly record widescreen video onto DVD+R and DVD+RW discs. 86.135.31.128 (talk) 18:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

No need for citation here

Just to say that this information has been here since 2006 without citation and it is just fine. It gave me the information I needed and seeing the note threatening it added to my ongoing doubts as to whether demanding citations on everything is really needed. Perhaps having an expert in the field sign off on the entry would be as good or better. The Britanica asked experts to write their entries and it showed great utility for longer than Wiki has existed. Just a thought.Henrysteinberger (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Somewhat late in the day but: Wikipedia requires that all material is properly cited by a verifiable reference (See WP:VERIFY). It is the editor adding the material's responsibility to cite the material (See WP:BURDEN). Any editor is free to delete anything that is not properly referenced. Indeed, one editor that I am aare of does nothing else, frequently deleting 50 to 60 unsourced points at a sitting (and has actually contributed no new material whatsoever). 109.153.242.10 (talk) 17:24, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Imcompatibilities

Don't know if this should be included but I've found that most DVD+RW and DVD-RW discs are incompatible with normal DVD players i.e. those installed in a TV, a stand-alone DVD player or those found as part of a DVD system in a car but not the actual DVD recording system it originated from. If anyone has experienced this and we can reach a consensus I'd like to suggestion a section on incompatibilities which states such. Rosie, Queen of Corona (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

There are no real incompatibilities as such. It's just that a few manufacturers did not like the fact that DVD+RW was developed and for many years refused to make equipment that supported it. Indeed one manufacturer, made their DVD video players such that they deliberately checked to see if the inserted disc was a recorded DVD+RW video disc, and if it was, feigned an inability to play it. In fact, the difference between DVD-RW and DVD+RW lies purely in the way that they are recorded. From a purely playback point of view, they are identical. 86.135.31.128 (talk) 18:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

What about DVD+RW 8.5?

The intro states that a dvd+rw can store up to 4.7 GB. I own several dual layer dvd+rw that can store approximately 8.5 GB.--Dvd-junkie (talk) 06:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

AFAIA, no dual layer RW media has hit the market - yet. Indeed: Googling 'DVD+RW DL' only turns up references to a specification but no actual discs for sale. Also, very few DVD drives claim to support dual layer rewriteable media. Even my brand spanking new Blu-ray drive only supports single layer rewriteable media (for both read and write). 86.135.31.128 (talk) 18:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

STOP PRESS: I am advised that a few RW DL discs did hit the market, but that manufacture has virtually ceased due to lack of sales (and compatible drives). It may be that there are still some stock languishing about. 86.135.31.128 (talk) 18:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Faster than 4x media.

After several years of drives being capable of writing DVD+RW faster than 4x speeds, only very recently has media faster than 4x hit the market. Why the very long delay? Memorex, Verbatim and Imation are the only 8x brands I've found. Bizzybody (talk) 22:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merge of DVD-R - DVD+R - DVD-RW - DVD+RW with DVD recordable

Please discuss this on Talk:DVD recordable#Proposed merge with DVD-R - DVD+R - DVD-RW - DVD+RW